Hacked nude celebrity photos may be child pornography

 

Child Porn claims to scare sites into taking down photos

Olympic gymnast McKayla Maroney claimed her nude photos are child porn, to scare web sites into removing her photos. 

Maroney’s lawyers confirmed that the leaked nude images of the U.S. gymnast were taken at the time when she was not yet 18. This means that the people who are involved in the leak and those who are storing copies of the images on their PCs could face a lawsuit on child abuse  Tech Times

But: Children photographing themselves are child porn producers

Little was McKayla Maroney aware she was incriminating herself of a heinous crime: "McKayla Maroney may be a victim of the leaked photo scandal, but she could be facing felony charges for child pornography." [2].  Any 17 or under "child" that takes photo of herself in any indecent pose, is a producer of child pornography (sexting). And mere possession of child pornography is punishable up to life in prison [3] [4

Child pornography can be fully dressed photos of 17 year olds

Deliberately posed pictures of children [up to 17 years of age] fully clothed, partially clothed or naked can be child pornography. If the dirty mind of a district attorney or policeman officer considers baby’s pose indecent, then Family pictures of nude baby bath can cause ruinous child porn prosecution.

Use a Polaroid, not the "cloud"

"Stars who want to take nude photos without getting hacked: Use a Polaroid: To keep private pictures private, never upload them online."[Fox News].

 

Will anyone question the stupidity of child pornography laws?

Only Human-Stupidity dares to ridicule voodoo theory, to  denounce child porn hysteria in 70 posts, to cite Milton Diamond‘s peer reviewed research and infamous Rind Study 

  

Share

Nudist non-sexual child photos, legal in Germany: trouble for MP Sebastian Edathy and Merkel’s government

 

 Edathy pornography affair: The story so far

Among the ring’s customers was Edathy, who is said to have ordered material from the site between 2005 and 2010. The material consisted of pictures of naked boys assumed to be between nine and 14, in various poses, but not involved in sexual activity. The possession of such pictures is not illegal in Germany.

That is interesting. In Germany, possession of harmless photos of young children naked is not a crime yet. You can see such young children live on the innumerous nude beaches in Germany.

Human Stupidity has trouble understanding, or explaining to children, why photos of 100% legal acts, or cartoons of such acts, can be such a terrible crime. On the other hand, videos of terrorist beheadings, made exactly for the impact on the viewer and the publicity,  are legal.

The scientific truth is that accessible porn reduces rape and prostitution, countering the voodoo theory. Of course, the child sex trauma myth lobby can only ask for harder punishments

Germany’s Child Protection Agency demands that any commerce with pictures of naked children must be penalized. Justice Minister Heiko Maas also comes out in favor of stricter laws.

A huge international police inquiry because of a few photos of naked boys, which happens to be legal in Germany. Have we no other problems? Millions of obese and sedentary children have their health and future destroyed. The Euro crisis causes massive unemployment and might lead to civil war. And we care about a few nude photos?

Watch this video, one would never think that these were simple nude photos, no sexual activity or abuse.

Unfortunately, outside Germany we are not allowed to see or show the photos to understand what all the fuzz is about (Disclaimer)

 

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Nudist non-sexual child photos, legal in Germany: trouble for MP Sebastian Edathy and Merkel’s government” »
Nudist non-sexual child photos, legal in Germany: trouble for MP S… » continues here »

Share

Court rules that 32-year-old man’s sex with 17-year-old was legal… but pictures of it cost him 8 years in prison

Court rules that 32-year-old man’s sex with 17-year-old was legal… but pictures of it were not

 

Although a man who was 32 wasn’t breaking the law by having sex with a 17-year-old girl in 2008, he was by photographing the act, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Marshall Hollins was convicted in Stephenson County of making child pornography and sentenced to 8 years in prison.

Is this not sad? It brings me to tears.

A good black man’s life destroyed, a girl’s boy friend taken away. All to protect her from "abuse". 

Where is Al Sharpton?

Where is President Barack Obama. I know, if he had a son, it would be a street fighting thug like Trayvon Martin. Where are men’s rights activists?

Where are the feminists, for the girl’s rights to have a boy friend, and to have her pictures taken?

 

He admitted he had sex with the girl when she was 17, which is the age of sexual consent in Illinois.

In a 5-2 ruling, the high court said that although the law allows 17-year-olds to consent to sex, they are still minors, making photos or video of such sex child porn.

This is nothing new:

The two dissenting justices said that because the photos don’t show an illegal act, they shouldn’t be illegal.

The dissenting minority has a bit of decency and common sense.

‘There was nothing unlawful about the production of the photographs taken by defendant in this case because the sexual conduct between defendant and (the girl) was entirely legal,’ wrote Justice Anne Burke, who was joined by Justice Charles Freeman.

‘The photographs are therefore not child pornography as defined by the U.S. Supreme Court for purposes of the First Amendment.

Due to voodoo theory and falsified research about the child sex trauma myth (Rind Study), the US supreme court made an EXCEPTION to constitutional rights of the First Amendment.

In the above case, no "*child" has been harmed through an illegal act, so there should be no reason to make an exception to constitutional first amendment rights.

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Court rules that 32-year-old man’s sex with 17-year-old was legal… but pictures of it cost him 8 years in prison” »
Court rules that 32-year-old man’s sex with 17-year-old was … » continues here »

Share

Child Sex Trauma Theory Traumatizes Children (#6)

 

Child Sex Trauma myth, a self fulfilling prophecy.
The faulty child sex trauma theory is the cause of child sex trauma.

Children generally do not get traumatized by *consensual adult/child sexual experiences. Rather the trauma is caused  by the reaction of parents, peers, teachers,  police, and, yes, therapists. Therapy is often traumatizing.

This conclusion is so drastic and shocking that even we, at Human-Stupidity.com only recently understood the profound implications. The hysterical falsification of science doesn’t just put men in prison with draconian punishments, it actually causes damage to children it purports to protect (compare also Milton Diamond) .

Prohibition of adult/child sexual contact must be justified on ethical, not on scientific grounds. In other words, don’t use false science to justify your moral rules. Disclaimer

Finkelhor (1979) proposed an ethical justification for prohibiting adult/child (defined as a prepubertal youngster) sexual behavior. The reason for using an ethical justification was that the justification based on psychological harm lacked cogency. According to Finkelhor, it was empirically weak since "it is possible that a majority of these children are not harmed" (p.693

Forcible, non-*consensual CSA (Child Sex Abuse), of course, is very different.

From the child’s point of view and from the commonsense point of view, there is an enormous difference between intercourse with a willing little girl and the forcible penetration of the small vagina of a terrified child. One woman I know enjoyed sex with her uncle all through her childhood, and never realized that anything was unusual until she went away to school. What disturbed her then was not what her uncle had done but the attitude of her teachers and the school psychiatrist. They assumed that she must have been traumatized and disgusted and therefore in need of very special help. In order to capitulate to their expectation, she began to fake symptoms she did not feel, until at length she began to feel truly guilty for not having felt guilty. She ended up judging herself quite harshly for this innate lechery (cited in Schultz, 1980, p. 39).   Rind, Tromovitch, and Bauserman: Politically Incorrect – Scientifically Correct

In addition to such anecdotal evidence, research with large samples clearly showed that many children did not get harmed by such adult/child sexuality. Disclaimer

But sex, in general, is not like being mauled by a dog or torture, which are always painful and traumatic. Sex is often just the opposite–the most pleasurable experience one can have. It therefore cannot be assumed a priori that a fourteen- or fifteen-year-old, for example, will react with trauma rather than pleasure just because his or her partner is older. In fact, teens of this age often do not react as the orthodoxy insists they must, as the following example illustrates. It was related by Dan Savage, in relation to the attacks on our study, in his nationally syndicated column “Savage Love” (July 29, 1999):

Why is this controversial? Speaking as a survivor of CSA at fourteen with a twenty-two-year-old woman; sex at fifteen with a thirty-year-old man–I can back the researchers up; I was not traumatized by these technically illegal sexual encounters; indeed, I initiated them and cherish their memory. It’s absurd to think that what I did at fifteen would be considered “child sexual abuse,” or lumped together by lazy researchers with the incestuous rape of a five-year-old girl.
The Condemned Meta-Analysis on Child Sexual Abuse

(The Child Sex Trauma Myth #6)

This is the 6TH in a series of articles about the Child Sex Trauma Myth
(#1 disclaimer, #2, #3, #4, #5)

Unlike Susan Clancy, who stumbled upon the truth and partially retracted:

  • Rind, Tromovitch, and Bauserman are the intellectual academic elite,
  • worthy of being published in the top journals of the American Psychological Association and
  • worthy of being unanimously condemned by US congress and senate

Such research and its unpopular results are absolutely taboo and verboten

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Child Sex Trauma Theory Traumatizes Children (#6)” »
Child Sex Trauma Theory Traumatizes Children (#6) » continues here »

Share

Balkanized Men’s Rights Movement vehemently supports feminist sex hysteria. MRA easily defeated by feminist unity (#5)

Men, even men’s rights activists (MRA), have definitely and permanently yielded to many feminist issues. Feminists have won the war on many fronts. Men are disunited, no match for unified women’s front. Frequently men, including MRA, even activelysupport feminist issues.

 

MRA against men. MRA (men’s rights activist) support draconian prison sentences for men #4

Old style anti-feminists like Ernest Belfort Bax still opposed sex hysteria and the relentless increase of age of consent. Similarly Angry Harry, universally acclaimed father of the men’s rights movement speaks up against sex hysteria.

This psychologist, Angry Harry is admired by Paul Elam at AVoiceForMen in unison with r/mensrights and most men’s rights activists. So much that the header of Avoiceformen is permanently adorned with Angry Harry‘s banner.avoiceformen-angryharry_thumb4_thumb.

But these modern father’s rights activists are in full support of feminist inspired  teenage sexuality and child porn hysteria. Worse, these modern MRA actively oppose sex positive men’s rights activist. See our article

 

(The Child Sex Trauma Myth #5)

This is the 5TH in a series of articles about the Child Sex Trauma Myth (#1 disclaimer, #2, #3, #4)

 

Anyone opposing 5++ year prison sentences for consensual sex with 15 year olds (teenage sexuality), or opposing draconian punishment for mere possession of nude "child porn" photos of 15 year olds (i.e. 0’1 and 1’s in a computer file)  will be unceremoniously kicked out.

Not only out of feminist sites but men’s rights sites.   Human-Stupidity was evicted recently for this comment. And these men’s rights activist then bemoan the lack of unity of the men’s rights movement.

Angry Harry, though universally admired as the father of MRA (men’s rights activism), would not be allowed to comment in most modern father’s rights MRA sites, like avoiceformen or r/mensrights. It reminds me of the joke where the bishop calls police to arrest Jesus who dared to show up in a church.

We expect it will be only a matter of time, until A Voice For Men disavows any links and relations to Angry Harry. We also would not be surprised if they support increasing the age of consent to 21 and then ban anyone who would support impunity for sex with 20 year old women.

Human-Stupidity certainly fully agrees with AngryHarry on these issues. We bemoan the fact that modern men’s rights has sold out many of men’s rights issues to feminists. Especially the child sex trauma myth has been totally accepted and assimilated by most MRA, has become the unassailable bedrock foundation of all feminist sex hysteria.

 

Angry Harry states the inconvenient truth not only on sex hysteria,

but also on issues as

  • Is the Training of Women Doctors A Waste of Money?  (Same issue is relevant in Australia where rural veterinarians are scarce. Women get most University spaces for veterinary medicine, because they have better grades. Once graduated, women mostly don’t have the physical strength to give birth to calves or sheep, don’t  want to work in rural areas, want to take care of pet dogs and cats in cities with normal office hours,  don’t want to work overtime, and retire early. Similarly, rural physicians are scarce in Germany, partly because of large number of female graduates that don’t accept to work in rural areas 2).

    Note that no modern MRA would dare to attack egalitarianism like this. As Angry Harry‘s article shows, feminist egalitarianism is expensive for society.  Women’s equality comes at a high cost to society. To be on equal footing with men, women would need quotas even in cooking, chess, snooker and tennis

  • Equality Between Men And Women Is Not Achievable
  • Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Balkanized Men’s Rights Movement vehemently supports feminist sex hysteria. MRA easily defeated by feminist unity (#5)” »
    Balkanized Men’s Rights Movement vehemently supports feminis… » continues here »

Share

MRA against men! Most MRA (men’s rights activist) actively support draconian prison sentences for men #4

Most men’s rights activists actively and vehemently support the relentless century-old feminist agenda 1 2 3 against male sexuality.

They became MRA (Men’s Rights Activist) after being stiffed by family court, divorce law, false accusations by their wives. They often have daughters. Thus these MRA are totally protective and sexually conservative, repressive and not libertarian.

These MRA totally agree with feminist inspired laws that cruelly imprison men for victimless crimes of *consensual sex with adolescents, for visits to voluntary prostitutes and for possessions patterns of 0’s and 1’s on their hard drive defined as child porn (see voodoo theory, disclaimer, Robert Kurzban)

 

MRA (Men’s rights activists) rightly assail biased anti-male laws regarding
Domestic Violence, *rape, due process, false rape accusations, child support, divorce.
But MRA are in full support of anti-male sex laws.

 

Even MRA are avid supporters of the feminist Child Sex Trauma Myth (#4)

This is the 4TH in a series of articles about the Child Sex Trauma Myth (#1 disclaimer, #2, #3)

 

 

Strict liability to compound the injustice

Feminists fought for the increase of age of consent and  the subsequent criminalization of normal male post-pubertal sexuality. This is further enhanced by unjust  Strict liability*
Strict liability crime” [1] [2] [3] [4] means: if you commit an act, (e.g. if you have sex with a minor) you are guilty and will be convicted. Even if she had a valid true government ID. because she duped the department of motor vehicles into giving her a incorrect age ID. It does not matter. If you had sex with a 17 year old, you are a *child *rapist.

 

Human-Stupidity hostilized, warned, banned by MRA

Human-Stupidity was blocked, chided, and banned at leading men’s rights sites r/mensrights and AVoiceForMen.

Check how Human-Stupidity’s moderate and reasonable comment 1, 2 led to banning from the otherwise excellent MRA activism site AVoiceForMen. My comments 1, 2 at the excellent article cited below (in #5) were understood by a few, but misunderstood by Paul Elam, who stands for many sex-repressive MRA’s

Can you share my outrage on this Family pictures of nude baby bath: ruinous child porn prosecution or this Mandatory 15 years jail for photos of legal girl friend: You Can Have Sex With Them; Just Don’t Photograph Them | 2

The comment above led to Human_Stupidity.com’s definite expulsion from the site of the most active and very representative MRA, AVoiceForMen.

avoiceformen-angryharry_thumb4_thumb_thumb

If these are the best defenders of men’s rights, we have a long way to go. Tens of thousands of men will be singled out for daily anal rape by common criminal prison gangs who hate "*child *rapists ".

Those prison rapists certainly will not understand the fine distinction between *consensual sex with 17 or 15 year olds and "real forcible rape of a real child" (in the classic sense of the words pre-pubertal *child and forcible *rape) . Even leading MRA Paul Elam succumbed to feminist brain washing and refuses to understand such obvious differences.

Paul Elam might even understand it. But he chooses not to enter a hopeless fight After all the prestigious peer reviewed Rind Study was rejected unanimously by both the US congress and senate. Academic research decided by politicians

So feminists have won the war on underage sex repression, so much that even MRA (men’s rights activists) don’t dare to even touch the topic.

Our pleading for unity among MRA leads to expulsion, not introspection and self analysis

AVoiceForMen pleaded for unity among MRAs. So we tried to help to raise awareness that they, themselves, actively abet and support the persecution of men. We did not manage to raise such awareness See our unwelcome comment further below.

 

Child Porn laws made specifically to criminalize men

Why may women legally devour Child abuse books by Amazon but inadvertent possession of a picture (usually by a man) is a heinous crime punishable by decades in jail? (Judge Weinstein, voodoo theory) What about the children photographed on the cover of the child abuse books?

Finally, I was shopping at ASDA (Wal-Mart) last week. They have a very small selection of books on sale. And I presume that they only sell those books that are in particularly high demand by the public. About 20% of the titles of the entire range were to do with ‘abuse’, and another 20% were to do with serial killers, murderers, torturers and, in general, ‘evil’ people. You know the type. angryharry.com/es_chris_langham.htm

Female pornography, the romance novel, is socially very acceptable. We specifically criminalize male preference for pictures. The handsome, witty, intelligent, rich, young physician, hero of a typical female romance novel humbles the average male and unrealistically raises women’s expectations.

 

Age of consent laws (sponsored by feminists) specifically target and criminalize men

Since long before biblical times, women choose older men for relationship and marriage.  Thus, automatically,age of consent laws ensnare mostly men.

Girls mature faster: marriageable age was lower for girls throughout history

One could make a very strong argument to imprison a 16 year old mature female for seducing a hormonally challenged mentally more immature 18 year old male.

Nowadays, sex has more traumatic consequences for boys then for girls
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “MRA against men! Most MRA (men’s rights activist) actively support draconian prison sentences for men #4” »
MRA against men! Most MRA (men’s rights activist) actively s… » continues here »

Share

Tea Abuse: How a traumatic event impacts children depends on how the adults cope with it. (MRA Angry Harry)

In a nutshell: Whatever kind of ‘abuse’ people have experienced in the past (rape, harassment, assault etc) is made CONSIDERABLY WORSE by those whose self-serving propaganda is designed to make them feel worse.

And then, unsurprisingly, the ‘researchers’ will ERRONEOUSLY interpret the CONSIDERABLY WORSE outcome as being caused by the ‘abuse’ rather than by the self-serving propaganda.

This is how those working in the abuse industry – which is vast in size – nowadays make their living.

And it is mostly at the expense of men.

Angry Harry is a widely admired MRA (men’s rights activist) from the old times, when MRA were not yet actively abetting feminist sex hysteria that imprison thousands of men for *consensual sex with post-pubertal willing girl friends or for possession of photos of girls that are legal to ‘f.uck but not legal to photograph. The antifeminist‘s blog roll lists the few remaining sites that oppose sex hysteria (disclaimer),  

How a traumatic event might impact on children
depends on how the adults around them cope with it.

(The Child Sex Trauma Myth #3)

This is the 3rd in a series of articles about the Child Sex Trauma Myth (#1 disclaimer, #2)

Studies looking at the effect of early traumatic experiences on children – that is, events experienced DIRECTLY by children rather than just images they have seen – have found that neither the severity of the event nor the age of the child at the time can help us predict whether the child will experience behavioural or emotional problems later on.

As child development expert Rudolph Schaffer points out:

‘It has become apparent that there is no direct relationship between age and the impact which experience has on the individual, that young children are not necessarily more vulnerable even to quite severe adversities than older children, and that considerable variability exists in long-term outcome.’

The one variable that does help to predict how a traumatic event might impact on children is how the adults around them cope with it.

From: Are the kids all right? Dr Helene Guldberg (PhD in Child Development) 
           quoted in `Tea Abuse | Angry Harry

Child sex abuse trauma is caused by society’s hysteria

Putting it bluntly: Any long-term negative effects stemming from events that happened in the past are considerably worsened – if not completely manufactured – by negative propaganda concerning such events.  `Tea Abuse | Angry Harry

 

Tea Abuse | Angry Harry

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Tea Abuse: How a traumatic event impacts children depends on how the adults cope with it. (MRA Angry Harry)” »
Tea Abuse: How a traumatic event impacts children depends on how t… » continues here »

Share

Child sex is not traumatic when it happens. Only much later (Child Sex Trauma Myth #2)

Susan Clancy was a firm believer in the conventional wisdom: adult child sex is a profoundly traumatic. devastating terrible experience. As a psychology graduate student, Susan Clancy trusted, that scientist’s unwavering certainty in the childhood trauma theory of sexual abuse was based on firm scientific proof.  We used to be equally trusting believers


Disclaimer
: We are not pedophiles and do not consume child porn. Rather we are interested in the truth to prevail and to become known. We demand unbiased academic research and laws to be informed by true facts and not to be based on myth and lies.


1) No Trauma: Child sex is mostly NOT traumatic when it happens! 

Susan Clancy

The Trauma Myth: The Truth About the Sexual Abuse of Children–and Its Aftermath

When Susan Clancy interviewed child abuse victims, most of them had not felt profound trauma during or after their abuse. Rather their feelings at the time of the sexual act ranged from somewhat positive to negative. The feelings were far from the level of profound trauma as violent forcible rape or war. These results were very surprising and totally counter to Susan Clancy’s expectations (The results were, though,  in agreement with the maligned Rind Study.)   [Disclaimer]

1b) The above refers to *consensual sex

 

2) Sigmund Freud’s was in denial about child sex reports

Sigmund Freud had simply ignored and denied the frequent self-reports of child sexual abuse. He heard reports about child sexuality and discarded them as childhood fantasies.  Until as late as the 1960ies, child sexuality was considered shocking, unusual, or criminal.

3) "Child sex trauma myth" was intentionally created to counter Freud’s denial

Susan Clancy suggests: As a counter-reaction to Freud’s denial, in order to protect children from sexual abuse, the theory of child sex trauma was created and dogmatically made unassailable.

4) Clancy backpedals: claims long term damage

Later, when children understand about sex, understand what they did, and understand that society considers this a extremely serious traumatic event, they reframe the event and perceive it as traumatic and damaging.

Clancy does NOT say this, but maybe the trauma theory causes the traumatic reframing. Or as one reader succinctly put it: "Society’s trauma myth is the real child abuse".

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Child sex is not traumatic when it happens. Only much later (Child Sex Trauma Myth #2)” »
Child sex is not traumatic when it happens. Only much later (Child… » continues here »

Share